scholarly journals Swobodny przepływ dokumentów w Unii Europejskiej: znaczenie i oddziaływanie rozporządzenia 2016/1191

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 91-123
Author(s):  
Maciej Zachariasiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
True Value ◽  
Civil Status ◽  
Effective Role ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Polish Code ◽  
The Hague Convention

The article is dedicated to the (still relatively unknown) EU Regulation 2016/1191. The Regulation disposes of some of the formalities with respect to circulation of the public documents within EU. In particular, no legalization in any form, including the apostille under the Hague Convention, will be needed with respect to documents covered by the Regulation. Unliked originally planned by the Commission, the Regulation does not, unfortunately, completes a more challenging goal of mandating recognition of the civil status throughout the Union. This issue still remains subject to national conflict-of-law rules. Moreover, the scope of Regulation is relatively narrow. It does not, again regrettably, apply to many public documents which are crucial in cross-border transactions (excerpts from commercial registers, powers of attorney for sale of immovable property). The author analyses to what extent Regulation 2016/1191 offers progress in circulation of documents. This question is first raised in light of the long standing application of the Hague Apostille Convention. The author then attempts to discern the effective role of the Regulation given the fact that under Article 1138 of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure, no legalization in any form is in principle required for the foreign public documents to be treated as authentic and official proof in Poland (although the practice often is to ask for the apostille even if not required by law). Still, the Regulation 2016/1138 might come of assistance for the parties in some respects. First, it will facilitate acceptance of Polish public documents in those Member States, which have so far required apostille. Second, the Regulation may help to overcome an incorrect practice in Poland of requiring apostille by the officials, where Article 1138 actually dispenses of such formality. Third, the Regulation introduces an administrative cooperation based on the IMI system which allows to verify doubts as to the authenticity of the public document from another Member States. This last feature of the Regulation, it is argued, may prove of its true value to the freedom of circulation of public documents within the EU.

Part III Recognition and Enforcement, 16 Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments: Introduction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartley Trevor C
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

This chapter considers the recognition and enforcement of judgments under Brussels 2012, Lugano 2007, and the Hague Convention. The relevant provisions are in Chapter III of Brussels and Lugano (and for authentic instruments and court settlements, Chapter IV); in Hague the relevant provisions are in Chapter III. These provisions apply only to judgments, authentic instruments, and court settlements from States covered by the instrument in question. Brussels applies only to Member States of the European Union; Lugano applies only to States to which Lugano applies; and Hague applies only to States that are Parties to that convention. The chapter discusses the terminology used in the three instruments, recognition and enforcement, what constitutes a judgment, jurisdiction of the court of origin, subject-matter of the judgment, and review as to substance (<i>révision au fond</i>).

Part III Jurisdiction, Foreign Judgments and Awards, 10 Jurisdiction of the English Courts—An Introduction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torremans Paul
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

This chapter provides an overview of issues relating to the jurisdiction of the English courts. It begins with a discussion of jurisdiction under the Brussels/Lugano system, focusing on four different sets of rules: the rules contained in the Brussels I Regulation as amended in the Brussels I Recast, the EC/Denmark Agreement, the Brussels Convention, and the Lugano Convention. It then considers jurisdiction under the rules contained in a modified version of the Brussels I Regulation, as well as jurisdiction under the traditional English rules (whether the English courts have power to hear the case; whether the court will decline jurisdiction or stay the proceedings. or restrain foreign proceedings; and whether there is a limitation upon the exercise of jurisdiction). The chapter also examines jurisdiction under the rules in the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements 2005, ratified by the European Union on behalf of all the Member States.

Defining the Regulations of War in the Hague Convention of 1907

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erazak Tileubergeno ◽  
Dana Baisymakova ◽  
Dinara Belkhozhayeva ◽  
Zhanar Moldakhmetova
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

scholarly journals Application of Brussels II bis regulation in exercising the right of access to a child by extended family members

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (90) ◽  
pp. 189-205
Author(s):  
Radmila Dragišić
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Hague Convention ◽  
Right Of Access

In this paper, the author explores the sources of European Union Law that regulate one segment of parental responsibility - the right of access to a child. The focal point of research is the transition from the conventional (interstate) regulation of judicial cooperation in marital disputes and parental responsibility issues to the regulation enacted by the European Union institutions, with specific reference to the Brussels II bis Regulation. First, the author briefly points out to its relationship with other relevant international law sources regulating this subject matter: the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction; the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in the Field of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children; and other international sources of law. Then, the author examines in more detail its relationship with the Brussels II bis recast Regulation, which will be applicable as of 1 August 2022. In addition, the paper includes an analysis of the first case in which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided on the application of the Brussels II bis Regulation, at the request of granparents to exercise the right of access to the child. On the issue of determining the competent court which has jurisdiction to decide on how this right shall be exercised, the CJEU had to decide whether the competent court is determined on the basis of the Brussels II bis Regulation or on the basis of national Private International Law rules. This paper is useful for the professional and scientific community because it deals (inter alia) with the issue of justification of adopting a special source of law at the EU level, which would regulate the issue of mutual enforcement of court decisions on the right of access to the child. This legal solution was proposed by the Republic of France, primarily guided by the fundamental right of the child to have contact with both parents.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document